Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Journal of Clinical Microbiology, August 2000, p. 3022-3028, Vol. 38, No. 8
Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Internal
Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota1;
Millennium Strategies2 and
Division of Immunology/Infectious Diseases, University of
Wisconsin Hospitals and Clinics,4 Madison,
Wisconsin; Specialty Laboratories, Inc., Santa Monica,
California3; and Corixa
Corporation/Infectious Diseases Research Institute, Seattle Life
Sciences Center, Seattle, Washington5
Received 23 December 1999/Returned for modification 20 March
2000/Accepted 14 May 2000
Evaluation of drug resistance by human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)
genotyping has proven to be useful for the selection of drug
combinations with maximum antiretroviral activity. We compared three
genotyping methods for identification of mutations known to confer drug
resistance in the reverse transcriptase (RT) and protease genes of HIV
type 1 (HIV-1). The HIV-GenotypR method (GenotypR; Specialty
Laboratories, Inc., Santa Monica, Calif.) with the ABI 377 DNA
sequencer (Applied Biosystems Inc.), the HIV PRT GeneChip assay
(GeneChip; Affymetrix, Santa Clara, Calif.), and the HIV-1 RT Line
Probe Assay (LiPA; Innogenetics, Alpharetta, Ga.) were used to genotype
plasma samples from HIV-infected patients attending the University of
Wisconsin Hospitals and Clinics and the Mayo Clinic. At the time of
analysis, patients were failing combination therapy (n = 18) or were treatment naive (n = 6). Forty codons of
the RT and protease genes were analyzed by GenotypR and GeneChip for
resistance-associated mutations. LiPA analyzed seven RT codons for
mutations. Each sample was genotyped by all three assays, and each
assay was subjected to pairwise comparisons. At least 92% of the
codons tested (by the three assays) in paired comparisons were
concordant. GenotypR and GeneChip demonstrated 96.6% concordance over
the 40 codons tested. GenotypR identified slightly more mutations than
GeneChip and LiPA; GeneChip identified all primary mutations that
corresponded to failing treatment regimens. Each assay identified at
least 84% of the mutations identified by the other assays. Mutations
that were discordant between the assays mainly comprised secondary
mutations and natural polymorphisms. The assays had better concordance
for mutations that corresponded to current failing regimens, present in
the more predominant viral quasispecies. In the treatment-naive
patients, GenotypR, GeneChip, and LiPA mainly identified wild-type
virus. Only the LiPA identified K70R, a possible transmitted zidovudine
resistance mutation, in the RT gene of a treatment-naive patient. We
conclude that although discrepancies in results exist between assays,
each assay showed a similar capacity to identify potentially clinically
relevant mutations related to patient treatment regimens.
0095-1137/00/$04.00+0
Copyright © 2000, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
Comparative Evaluation of Three Human
Immunodeficiency Virus Genotyping Systems: the HIV-GenotypR Method,
the HIV PRT GeneChip Assay, and the HIV-1 RT Line Probe
Assay
*
Corresponding author. Mailing address: Division of
Infectious Diseases, Mayo Clinic, 200 First St., SW, Rochester, MN
55905. Phone: (507) 255-7762. Fax: (507) 255-7767. E-mail:
wilson.john{at}mayo.edu.
This article has been cited by other articles:
Copyright © 2009 by the American Society for Microbiology. For an alternate route to Journals.ASM.org, visit: http://intl-journals.asm.org | More Info»